This page contains and includes our opinions:
Rude Customers
aka
The Paris Hilton Syndrome
We Won't Tolerate it for a New York Second
-An Editorial and Guide to Shopping in Our Store-
By FakeNewspapers.com(How to get asked to leave our store)
This content has been explicitly cleared for public
dissemination by our First Amendment attorneyCustomers complain about businesses all day, every day; they do it loudly, vocally, obnoxiously, often righteously, often wrongly, publicly, sometimes even illegally. One thing's sure: They do it copiously. But does a business wronged by an irrational, dishonest, insolent, or downright stupid customer have the same right to publicly disseminate its own defense?
Let's see what the First Amendment (and Google) have to say
More about electronic harassment
We have a financial interest in a national restaurant chain. That chain employs the most strict and customer-biased customer service policy of any business we know of in the United States today. Still, that chain experiences some type of problem with roughly 4% of its customers. No company could try harder to please -- yet they are still victim to outrageous behavior and rudeness from thousands of customers, nationally, every day.
Walmart is another prime example of over-the-top customer service. Walmart will do far more than it should to make sure every single customer is happy and content -- even to the point of losing money. Whatever else anyone may think of Walmart, their customer service is beyond reproach. It's as good as it gets. It is absolutely world-class. Our rating by the company that rates Walmart is 4.5 stars out of 5. Why then does Walmart suffer from a 4 out of 5 star rating?
And some customers believe (even sane ones), and they're mostly correct, that businesses are greedy, that they live for the buck, that they can never get enough business, and those ideas make the customer think they have the business "over a barrel", and that they, the customer, can act and behave in whatever rude, reprehensible, insulting manner they choose, and the business, being "over the barrel", simply has no choice but to put up with them and turn the other cheek for even more abuse.
Some bad customers think that all businesses MUST put up with their antics, their dishonesty, their attempts at outright fraud, their temper tantrums, their utter stupidity, their foul language, their threats. In many cases, that's true! In the corporate environment, it is a mortal sin to answer rudeness with rudeness. Walmart has probably NEVER blocked a customer from shopping in its stores. Some customers even seem to think it's against the law for a retailer NOT to do business with them, no matter how outrageous, insulting or spoiled they act.
They're wrong
Every retailer in America is struggling under a growing load of spoiled customers.
These are the people who drink too much and make a scene on the airliner at 30,000 feet -- and end up handcuffed to their seat wearing a dunce cap for the remainder of the flight. These are the folks you never invite over to dinner. These are the neighbors a block over with the five howling hound dogs, and three old fridges, four dismantled cars and six mangy, mostly hairless, ringworm cats in the yard. And, sometimes, oddly, these are the well-dressed upper-middle class yuppies who live in the three story tri-level in the upscale gated community in the burbs, or the trendy downtown hi-rise condo. Substance abuse often plays a major role in the creation of these personalities. We once watched as a man (a known local drunk and malcontent) drove onto a car-ferry and was directed to pull into lane #2. He didn't like being told what to do so he pulled into lane #3 which was being reserved for a semi tractor-trailer rig which was just coming onto the ship. Against the crew's orders he stayed in lane #3. He steadfastly refused to move and was eventually issued a citation. When the ferry docked the man chose to protest his treatment by refusing to drive off the boat. That meant no one else in that lane could drive off the boat. An hour later his car was towed and he was arrested -- and of course he STILL had to pay the fine for disobeying the crew's orders. To this day he believes he was right. That man shouldn't shop here.
We once were in a position to watch the flow of email complaints come in to an old Seattle-based company called Seattle Film Works. This poor company received more nasty, threatening email in ten minutes than we receive every five years, so it was a good place to study this phenomenon. SFW was compelled to answer all of them politely -- even those that were hideously rude, foul, rambling, illogical -- half the time the customers seemed to be on something -- and there were many that were overtly physically threatening. SFW explained to us that customers were far more rude through email than they would ever be in person, because to act that way in person would probably earn them some loose front teeth or get them arrested. We could never understand why SFW or any other company would tolerate such illogical, counter-productive abuse. All that niceness by SFW didn't seem to do them any good -- they went largely belly-up anyway. Maybe they failed because they persisted in carrying and catering to such a heavy load of miserable, genetically problematic customers, instead of having cut them off at the first sign of illogical behavior and childish, arrogant rudeness.
Fortunately, our customers are of a far higher caliber than probably any other business type in the world. Our problem-customers don't make up 4% of our customer base, as in the case of the national restaurant chain. They don't make up even 1%. Our problem cases constitute no more than about 2 tenths of one percent -- down from a few years ago because we've been active in dissuading problem customers from shopping with us. This is an amazingly low average. It's perhaps due also to the type of product we sell -- the concept of a fake newspaper usually requires at least a little intelligence to visualize, plan, and execute. And it requires, of course, that the customer can READ -- something not demanded of diners or Walmart shoppers cruising for K-Mart's Blue Light Special.
Still, when we encounter those very few nasty customers (less than a handful a year out of tens of thousands of orders) they tend to stick with us. We remember them. They not only ruin our day, but often our week. We don't want these people to order from us -- heck, we don't even want them to peruse our websites. We don't want to be bothered by them; we don't even want to have to think about that mentality of spoiled-brat trouble-maker. And here's where we have the supreme advantage over other retailers: We don't care if we make money! We are absolutely, positively not in this for the loot. If we needed money we'd go back to the business that netted us $10,000 a day. But that wasn't fun. And this is. And that's why we do this. We're in this to HAVE FUN, and to interact with NICE PEOPLE and to help them carry out their gags and jokes, because we genuinely love gags and jokes, and we like to help our customers laugh, so they can make their friends and families laugh -- because that makes us laugh. Often out loud.
But on the dark side, for instance, last week we had a customer named Maegan Poland (aka "Hyphenated-Woman"). She ordered a fake newspaper and apparently chose not to read our written instructions on the form regarding the composing of headlines with regard to hyphens -- or if she did she didn't heed it. Here's a screen-shot of the instructions as they've been posted for years, or you may simply click the green "?" help button on every field in the form. Maegan Poland supplied a headline that was impossible not to hyphenate (see images below), even though she'd been advised, in writing, not to do so. She received the product and complained about the hyphenated word (room-mate) (her email is HERE), stating that this was the only problem she had with the product. At this exact moment we placed Maegen Poland on our blocked list, but didn't mention that to her -- hopefully she would never order again and in that case there was no need for a confrontation at this point. We don't LIKE people who try to get others to pay for their mistakes (a la Paris Hilton), and we've taken steps to keep them out of our lives whenever possible. Demanding to be compensated for one's own mistakes is indicative of a peculiar laziness that seems to be insidiously permeating the very fabric of American society. We're sick of it. We're sick of credit card fraudsters, we're sick of people who sign for their deliveries and then try to claim they never received them, we're sick of checks that bounce (we no longer accept them AT ALL); we're sick of shysters of every type and description. We're sick of customers who spell something incorrectly on their form and then try to claim we changed it (they have their own copy of the form, for God's sake). In years past we endured someone trying to get something for nothing maybe once every two or three months. In 2007 we're seeing these attempts on AVERAGE two or three times per DAY, and we have bloody-well had enough of it. Still, against our better judgment, we were polite in our reply to Poland. We now understand that courtesy was utterly wasted. We simply wanted her to GO AWAY and we wanted to give her as little excuse as possible to become problematic, because we instinctively knew that she was BY NATURE problematic. Of course her reply back was, predictably, (1) unnecessary and (2) snippety and condescending, designed to accomplish nothing more than to insult; it served no other purpose whatsoever. It was nothing more than a snotty retort from a spoiled brat. This is representative of the stupid driver on your commute home this evening who was too busy trimming her eyelashes to pay attention to the road and nearly killed you -- then honked at YOU and flipped you the bird. This type of childish sniping really incites us. It's counter-productive; it's sophomoric at best; it's just dumb. It's the domain of spoiled, petulant, insolent, nasty little girls and we don't ever want to devolve into the type of Prozac-overdosed zombies who would take that crap in stride. This type of behavior epitomizes much of what we find disappointing about modern American culture. We don't see it to this degree anywhere else in the world. It is, specifically, at the root of the reason much of the International Community simply hates America. Anyone who (1) refuses to READ THE DIRECTIONS and then (2) complains about it as though it's not their fault and (3) expects to be compensated for their own mistakes is not a customer we want as a repeat. This gal was obviously a problem looking for a place to happen and we had, over the years, become more assertive in weeding those types out. Had this woman haughtily conveyed this message verbally to any clerk in any physical store the clerk would have replied with something like, "Please do!" Even if the clerk, utilizing a momentary infusion of Super-Human restraint, had somehow managed to muzzle their true sentiments and said nothing to a sniping customer, they would have been glad to see this customer's butt go through the exit, and loathe to see it ever return. Fortunately, we're not politically correct, we're not at the mercy of some limp-wristed, ass-kissing corporation, and we call them as we see them. Did this woman actually believe that we WOULD accept more orders from someone who complains about a hyphen -- a hyphen she was explicitly warned not to cause? Not a chance. Did she actually believe she was hurting us by promising not to order from us again? She'd already been blocked! Her snippety comment was all she could think of on spur of the moment. We're betting life for her parents was a living hell (albeit one of their own creation). But rather than argue we very bluntly told her we'd had enough of her and that we had blocked her from ordering again, and also blocked her from being able to further pester us by email or any other means. At this point we were thoroughly disgusted, but we had ended the interaction, and that should have been the end of the issue for all time: The company won't sell to you; the company won't communicate with you; you have EXACTLY what you ordered. End of story, right? But we don't believe Maegan Poland has EVER not gotten her way (thanks heaps, parents of Maegan Poland). Immediately (within 12 hours) we began receiving threatening emails routed through a server used by a Hollywood-type studio, located in the Burbank area (Poland is in Santa Monica (virtually next door, by L.A. standards). What a coincidence. We believe we've now documented to our satisfaction a connection between employees or associates of that business (people having access to that server) and this wonderful human being -- a little subpoena authority would flesh out the facts in short order. The (ex)customer (Poland) then filed a complaint against us with the BBB stating that she wanted an apology from us "for her aggravation" (her words verbatim). She also wanted a refund. She wanted a refund not because she didn't like her product, but because (and we have this in writing) she wanted to be compensated "for her aggravation". We obviously refused to appease her in any way and so stated that to the BBB. That complaint turned into many complaints spewing forth from Poland, through other agencies, all, we suggest, having one and only one purpose: to harass and annoy and, if possible, damage us financially. Indeed, you can put lipstick on a sow and call it Monique, but a pig is still a pig.
Bottom line: There's NO LAW that says we have to do business with ANYONE.
So what IS a mistake we'll correct for free?
It's one that WE MADE.
WE. WON'T. CORRECT. YOURS.The Polands of the world seem utterly incapable of grasping this concept, and all merchants everywhere are absolutely sick to death of this outrageous, misguided sense of entitlement. If you're in retail, you know exactly what we mean.. Again we refer the reader to "www.CustomersSuck.com.
Here's a classic mistake WE MADE:
.
Note the letter "P" preceding what should have been a lone "A" to begin the sentence. The customer politely brought it to our attention and didn't obnoxiously DEMAND a reprint -- because they didn't have to. We looked up their order and could clearly see that there was no errant "P" on their order form. Easy conclusion: It's OUR FAULT. How? We never figured it out, but there it was. We apologized profoundly and profusely and printed a new set within 30 minutes. It shipped the following day. All was well. We were happy that the customer was pleasant and the customer was happy to have his corrected product in record time. That's how normal business is conducted between normal people. --Not by ranting that we're scum-sucking bastards and we'll rue the day we ruined someone's life by letting a typo slip by in an order. If it's our mistake we'll always fix it. It goes without saying. But if it's your mistake we expect you to act like a grownup and choke it down, like we all do when we make a mistake. It puzzles us significantly that there are people who just don't "get" that concept.
A few days after the Poland fiasco we received an order for a fake newspaper from one EILEEN MCDERMOTT. This was a bizarre case because there was no error in her order and it wasn't even due yet, but the lack of any problem won't stop some folks from complaining. We figure they just like to. On Saturday she had inquired as to whether or not we could get her order to her by the following Thursday. We said we "probably" could, depending on the carrier doing its job. She then ordered. We filled the order literally in 18 minutes because this nice customer was so worried about her order arriving in time for her event. We then notified her that the order was completed and had shipped. She was sent a tracking number by USPS (if that email doesn't go through we receive an exception notice, and we received no such notice), and that's a fact. The owner of this company hand-carried the shipment to the carrier, trying (foolishly) to "be nice" and provide that "extra mile" of service, but was too late for the item to go out that Saturday (by mere minutes). Instead it was dropped at the shipping center and went out on Monday for a delivery most likely on Wednesday. On Tuesday we began receiving emails from MCDERMOTT to the effect that she felt we were ripping her off, because she felt no company could ever fulfill an order that quickly (and so we probably never even made or shipped her order). This was the first time we'd ever been insulted for our lightning-fast order fulfillment. MCDERMOTT lamented that she had NOT received her tracking number (in virtually every such case it can be found in the "deleted" or "spam" folders) and insinuated that she still felt we had somehow ripped her off and had probably never sent her item at all. She prattled on for paragraph after paragraph, denouncing us personally and suggesting that there was no question her product would be amateurish junk if she ever received it, etc. etc. ad nauseam. We responded to her one final time by providing the tracking number a second time, showing that the item left our city on Monday (she even subsequently complained about that saying it was not the real tracking number but she had somehow finally made it work), and also advising her in no uncertain terms to cease and desist, that she had been blocked from ordering from us again. That should have been the end of it..
Mcdermott's order was delivered on the following day (Wednesday, a day earlier than she needed it). Our spam logs continued to report a growing collection of nasty-grams from the woman, and we were then facing the inconvenience of filing a criminal harassment complaint if she didn't finally give up. Of course she never did give up. We call this the "Paris Hilton Syndrome".
These two irksome customers represent, in one week, two of the four to six such miserable customers we expect to see all year (usually in the Fall, through January, mainly around Christmas when people have spent too much and they're cranky). You know the reckless driver who cut you off on your way to work this morning, and then flipped YOU the bird when you honked? Those are the characters we don't want as customers. No one does. We pray they'll go pester our competitors -- and we know exactly what kinds of products they'll get from those competitors, so it all works out to be so perfectly poetic.
Some years ago there was a friend to our company -- a diving instructor by trade. Nice guy. Honest. Lots of fun to hang out with. Stable. Friendly. We liked him alot. He once went shopping in a major chain grocery store. He picked up a can of peas from the shelf and mentally added the posted price to his mental list. During checkout the cashier charged him seven cents more for the can of peas than he had remembered them being. He objected; the cashier double-checked. Sure enough, the can of peas really did cost seven cents more than was posted on the shelf. But upon closer examination it turned out that the can our friend took from the shelf came from the place where a different brand was normally shelved. The brand our friend picked up was simply in the wrong row. All he'd had to do was pay attention to the price for the brand he picked up, but he didn't -- he only paid attention to the price where the can was located at that particular moment. Probably some kid or harried housewife had inadvertently moved it. Our friend was incensed, and demanded the cheaper price. The cashier gave it to him without even checking with management. One might think that would assuage our friend's ire. No such luck. He then decided that the store should give him several cans of peas to make up for his "aggravation". The manager came, looked bewildered, didn't want any trouble, and so gave the man four cans of peas for free. One might think the man would be happy. But again, no such luck. The whole issue worked on his mind over the next week, and when he returned to the store again he demanded to see the manager, and insisted upon receiving a whole case of peas for free. Our friend insisted that it was the least the store could do "for his aggravation". The manager argued with him at this point. This was, obviously, getting out of hand. Our friend threatened to sue; the store stood its ground. Our friend threatened to make the whole episode very, very public. The store was afraid of the ramifications of that in that small town where the store was barely surviving anyway. The store finally caved and gave our friend a whole case of peas, gratis. We listened to this story as our friend told it over and over, to anyone he could get to listen, constantly berating the store, and publicly threatening to still sue. Finally one day our friend worked himself up into such a lather that he made a formal written demand to the manager to supply him with peas for life, or he would sue. The manager answered with a registered letter advising our friend to cease and desist, and to never enter their store again. At this point we severed contact with our friend, and we know no more. We did hear, however, that our friend continued to berate and insult that store, and probably still continuing through today, nearly ten years later. We don't need or want customers like that. We won't even tolerate friends like that.
We once performed the rescue of a stricken King Crabber that had run onto a reef in an 88 knot blow, then turned over. The Coast Guard helicopters had tried to pick the survivors off the bottom of the wreck, but blowing spray in sub-zero conditions kept icing up their blades, and they were forced to abandon the rescue. An 82 foot cutter was then dispatched, but less than 30 minutes into the storm that cutter turned tail and ran back to port, even as their commander demanded over and over across the public airwaves that she should continue her mission. We passed the cutter on our way out, port to port, she steaming for her snug berth as fast as she could go, us heading to work. The public thinks the Coast Guard are heroes. Sometimes they're not. We saved all the crew and the vessel as well, and delivered her to the weighs the following day. The vessel suffered less than a hundred thousand in damages. Our salvage bill, if sent through arbitration as it should have been, would have amounted to at least 20% of the value of the ship, and perhaps as high as 35%. She had been purchased three months before, for 5.5 million. Since we had also once been commercial fishermen, we identified with the poor skipper/owner who had neglected to buy insurance, and we cut him a break. We charged $5500. That skipper and crew berated us for "ripping them off" for at least twenty years after the fact. We lived, and we learned, about customers. We learned then, and many times since, that when confronted with a crazy customer who's genetically predisposed to complaining, it doesn't matter what you do to appease them -- they're going to trash you until their batteries run down, and that might take years. Walmart's customers complain far more than ours do, yet Walmart gives the customer absolutely anything they want in an obviously misguided attempt to make them happy. Guess what? Some customers will NEVER be happy (a la "Can of Peas" man), and it's a waste of time to try to make them so. Honor demands the businessman make it RIGHT when there is a business-mistake to MAKE right in the first place. But the bitchy patron deserves no more than that. We would say to Walmart, you may as well grow a backbone and at least enjoy some self respect, because even as nice as you are, your customers are still berating you to the tune of 4 stars out of 5, when you actually deserve 6.
We once endured the vicious threats and ravings of a Realtor from Nashville who swore we were thieves because she never received her order. When we sent her a copy of the delivery receipt she signed, she claimed the postman had forged it. It took us three months and a criminal complaint to get rid of this woman, and in the end she admitted in writing to receiving the order and being happy with it. She'd been angry because her order arrived a day later than she expected it (but still two days earlier than it was due). The complete file on that fiasco is floating around this website somewhere. Some people are just plain crazy, and we won't deal with those who are. Maybe Walmart will; we won't.
The point is this:
(1) We're NOT in this business to make money.
(2) We ARE in this business to help nice people laugh.
(3) If a customer is abusive and rude, even snippety and condescending, they're outta here. Period. No second chance. No appeal. We don't need 'em, we don't want 'em. No one does. We have far too many really nice, fun, decent, logical, intelligent customers who need and deserve our attention and concentration and commitment, to put up with the occasional clinker.
(4) We come from a deep-sea diving background, and from law-enforcement. We've seen it all. We've done it all. We have zero patience with spoiled brats and nasty customers. None. Zip. Nada. If you ever have a legitimate problem with one of our products, we'll bend over backwards to make sure it's FIXED. But rude, spoiled brats who feel they can attack one of the most efficient and honorable businesses in the world today with nonsense and illogic and dishonesty and harassment and ugliness will find us as immoveable as a concrete bridge abutment. We won't hesitate to cut them off, to block them from placing future orders, from even accessing and viewing our site. We won't hesitate to post their rantings of questionable sanity on this website and we won't hesitate to seek a restraining order and law enforcement remedies when they attempt to abuse us. If they have trouble with many retailers, chances are the problem is on their end. In that case, they shouldn't shop here.
All Internet businesses suffer from this malady, most to far greater degrees than us (get some laughs (or a headache) at "CustomersSuck.com"), but most are afraid to post anything to dissuade those problem cases from shopping because they figure a buck's a buck, no matter how they must schmooze, and prostrate and humiliate themselves to get it. We don't value a buck that highly. We absolutely do not. Our self respect and peace of mind are more important to us by an order of magnitude than any amount of money. We're beginning to see a slow, molasses-like movement in this country of some businesses, even corporations, finally standing up to outrageous customers who've lived far too long under the umbrella of that peculiarly American "misguided sense of entitlement". It's about time. Corporate America has wanted the consumer's dollar so badly that they've spoiled a whole generation of Americans to the point that even they can't stand them anymore.
To our honest, good-natured, intelligent, fun-loving and loyal patrons (and that means very nearly all of you), THANK YOU! We thoroughly enjoy helping you bring off your gags and you can ALWAYS count on us to make your product as flawlessly as can be in this mortal realm of existence and to get it out to you in the quickest, most efficient manner humanly possible, given the dismal state of affairs today with regard to shipping carriers. But to those very, very few who are simply ugly people inside, who trundle along like ham-fisted oafs from one dramatic, illogical social catastrophe to the next through their entire lives, often as a result of a lifetime of substance abuse issues (or maybe they're just genetically nasty), we say: go away. We promise they don't want to tangle with us, because when it comes to purging problematic customers and losing that tiny bit of problematic revenue, We. Don't. Care. We will fire them at the drop of a hat. Curiously, 6 of the 11 memorably shitty customers we've suffered in the past 10 years were from New York City.
Some years ago someone came into our office, which at that time was located in a fairly rural area surrounded by a number of treed vacant lots. A 30-something woman explained that while she lived in New York City, she owned one of the lots next to us and had traveled out west to see it for the first time, and to put it up for sale. Trouble was, she explained, there was one offending tree that was blocking the marine view from the most likely building site on her property. That tree was on our property. Would we mind cutting it down. Ten minutes later the tree was down, and her view restored. No big deal. We had plenty of trees. It was just the neighborly thing to do. As we finished up with that we remembered all the trouble we'd had with teenagers driving through her vacant lot late at night, drinking and partying. We asked if she minded if we took one of the trees that were adjacent to her driveway and knocked it down across that driveway, so as to stop the party problems. The woman was incensed. She flatly refused, treated us as if we were from Mars, and stomped back to her car, never to be seen again. She was positively indignant that we would ask such an incredible imposition of her. Why, the nerve of us! In fact it had been for her benefit as much as ours, to stop the buildup of trash and broken beer bottles on her soon to be for sale view lot. This is the mentality of many people today, regardless of where they hail from, but it seems to be most often the mentality of the city-bred New Yorker. When we deal with New Yorkers today, we expect this kind of bizarre morality from the get-go. If it doesn't occur, great. But very often it does..
Want the best gag products in the world, customized flawlessly, shipped and delivered lightning-fast? Shop with us and be polite, or even just neutral. We'll get along great..
Want to get thrown out of our store? Then customers need only engage in the exact same obnoxious antics that would get them thrown out of any other brick-and-mortar store, and we'll instantly oblige.
-----------------------------------------------------------
This was originally the end of this editorial. No personal addresses were used in the initial editorial above (and no phone numbers are used even now). Sadly, the customers mentioned herein were not content to let it stand. This saga now continues below:
-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------
Example Case #2 --- Maegan Poland
This content has been explicitly cleared for public
dissemination by our First Amendment attorneyThe customer in this case, as explained above, was angry because her newspaper headline had been hyphenated, even though she had been instructed, in writing, to NOT supply a headline that needed hyphenation. We refused to print a new copy for free, as any business would.
The Issue:
Hyphenation is bad, but it was the least offensive
option given the headline we had to print.
(this is what Poland received).
Wasted white space is bad
Mixed spacing -- unattractive
Wasted white space is bad
Mixed spacing -- unattractiveHad we chosen any of the remaining options we have no doubt Maegan Poland would have complained about them too. The only proper solution was to have chosen a headline that worked in the space allotted, just as our help-section on the form describes. If the customer ignores the instructions we have no choice but to print what they supply, choosing the lesser of the evils when formatting. Amazingly, THIS is what Maegan Poland has been throwing a temper tantrum over for two full weeks, and that tells the story. This (ex) customer can't understand why we blocked her from ordering "three or four more".
Poland has been throwing a temper tantrum ever since. Maegan Poland repeatedly sent complaints to our BBB, until they finally stopped her at three. She then began sending complaints to other agencies, including the California Department of Justice. That office has asked us to reply, and we've done so as shown below:
RESPONSE:
State of California
Department of Justice
PO Box 944255
Sacramento, Ca.
94244-2550We are in receipt of your case number PIU: 1812--, tendered to you on 8-8-07, from one:
Maegan Poland
855 10th Ave. #106
Santa Monica, CA., 90403
maepoland@yahoo.com
We had not bothered to look up Poland’s address and we may have actually not gotten around to it; however since you’ve supplied it, we now have reason to believe that we may be able to associate Poland with “other events” that have been perpetrated from her specific region in the last few days. We’ll take that up directly with Santa Monica PD.
With regard to the amazing document we received from you on Miz Poland’s behalf, we’re going to suggest to you that you file Poland’s report as a false complaint, tendered to you for the express purpose of harassment against us. A clear explanation follows:
Poland states that she is seeking an attorney. She should have sought one before she began digging the hole she now finds herself in. Poland makes the flat-out statement to you that she has been threatened by us, apparently to such a vicious degree that she feared for her very life. That is a lie. As such it is actionable in civil court. It is in our view prosecutable as a false report to your office. We will pursue it as such. We state to you the following: In this instance, Maegan Poland has lied to you. That is a fact. We would dearly love to see the threat she refers to, and we ask that you ask her for it, and forward a copy to us, so that we can forward it to our attorney for immediate action. If Poland is also now in the business of forgery, which would not surprise us in the slightest degree, then we will indeed have a criminal charge to work with.
Poland states that her rather adolescent newspaper headline was hyphenated. Indeed it was. Poland states that she has never seen a hyphenated headline before. It really does not matter if she’s seen one before or not. We’ve seen many. A hyphenated headline is considered non-standard in newspaper circles, which is why real newspapers will almost always (but not always) change the wording of their headline if the headline in question cannot be arranged without hyphenation. In the case of our customers, we can NOT change their headlines. They have chosen what they want to say, and we must print what they supply. We cannot make up headlines for them as we have no way of knowing if we would be inadvertently changing the meaning of their headline. We've had many customers complain when we corrected their punctuation or spelling, admonishing us severely, insisting that "endeavor" really IS spelled "e-n-d-e-v-er" in Kentucky. Because of this, we show a warning on the form that Poland completed in order to buy this newspaper. Here it is, copied verbatim, from the form that Poland used to place this order, where it has resided for years:
This is the main headline for your newspaper, not for your specific article. There's room for only 60 characters (30 per line). You can place certain words on one line, and certain words on a second line if desired. Obviously this prints. Leave blank or type NONE if not ordering the whole or poster sizes. Cap all words, keep short! (eg Mars Attacks!, etc.). A note about headlines: A "real" newspaper can pick and choose, and alter its own headline to suit. That means that if the headline is a two-liner and the words don't line up just right, the editor can find new words that do, without being forced to hyphenate anything in the first line. Hyphenating a headline is "BAD". Unfortunately, we don't choose your headline -- YOU do. And we are loath to change it. Therefore, please consider how your headline might format itself if it's likely to be two lines. We have all kinds of tricks to avoid hyphenating a headline; we can stretch and squeeze the text, move words here and there, but in the end there MAY be times when there is simply no other choice but to hyphenate your headline. You can avoid this by being careful about composing your headline. Note that in the headline field on this form there are two lines. If your headline takes up more than one line, do both lines "balance out"? Or can they be rearranged so they do balance out, and have close to the same number of characters (including spaces) on both lines? If the differences between the two lines are extreme, you may be stuck with a hyphen.
We try to get customers to read all instructions; you can lead a horse to water…..but you can’t make him drink.
Maegan Poland mysteriously neglected to tell you this part, probably because she realizes she has no legitimate reason to complain in the first place, but wants to complain anyway, because that is, in our view, simply her nature. Poland tendered three (3) complaints to the Better Business Bureau, as well, and failed to mention this fact to them too. She was finally stopped from complaining to them after three regimens of nonsense. To our knowledge she never did acknowledge to the BBB that she had been very explicitly warned, in writing, not to use a headline that required hyphenation, but that she had done so anyway. She probably can’t face this even in her own mind. We call this the "OJ Simpson Syndrome" (OJSS)..
We responded to Poland initially, absolutely politely, and she has so graciously seen fit to supply you with a copy. We stated only that we would not make a reprint for a hyphenation (BECAUSE SHE WAS TOLD IN WRITING NOT TO DO IT WHEN SHE ORDERED). We knew at the moment we received Poland’s request for a free product that this was a woman who was little more than a problem looking for a place to happen, and we didn’t want her to happen to us. We have no doubt that any person who ignores a company’s explicit instruction not to order something in a certain way, and then complains about it when they order it that way anyway, is a person who almost certainly has trouble with every second or third business they come in contact with, and in almost all cases the trouble is instigated by the customer while the company is at fault in no way whatsoever. We wanted to side-step a problem customer, but by the same token we are not in the business of correcting customers’ mistakes for free. At this point Poland was perfectly free to order another copy, this time completing the form as she was instructed, as all other customers do. Poland, of course, chose not to do this, but rather to assault our senses with a bitchy, snippety little note stating that “she” had never seen a hyphenated headline and that she would certainly take her business somewhere else. At the latter, we cheered. At the former, we just shook our heads. There will always be a certain percentage of customers who will never, ever take responsibility for their own actions. Poland is, it seems clear, one of those.
When we received that second email, we knew for certain that our fears were confirmed, that this individual was a problem looking for a place to occur, and since a neutral tone hadn’t dissuaded her, we tried a tack more to the point. We told her in no uncertain terms to go away. That’s all we wanted, and at that point, that’s all she needed to do. She had the product she had ordered, she had told us she liked the product except for her own mistake, and we had no further business to conduct with her. We wanted her gone so we could concentrate on our sane and reasonable customers, which constitute almost every single one of them. Only three times in ten years have we seen a clinker like this – unfortunately two of them came along in one week. We hope those two will become best buddies, because they certainly deserve each other. It would only be a matter of time before they were filing complaints against each other.
Poland states that after she complained to the BBB we posted her name on our website. Poland should check her dates; her name was posted long before her BBB complaints, and, we believe, her BBB complaints were a childish form of retaliation for having posted her name.
Poland stated to the BBB that her friend had found her name by searching Google. In point of fact, her name had only been posted for a couple of days and was weeks from being picked up by Google (if it ever would have been). Why this particular charade? We’ve no clue. Poland must have thought she had something to gain from it.
At this point we will bring to your attention a pivotal piece of fact, another item that Poland has very cleverly tried to keep both the BBB and your office from knowing about. In her complaint to you, Poland marks the end of our emails to her, “….END CORRESPONDENCE”. In FACT the correspondences did not end there at all. Here is the signature that is attached to every single email that goes out from our office, and this is easily verified by using the encoded checksum header data of the emails to mathematically prove the content:
--------------------------------------------------
www.FakeNewspapers.Com
--------------------------------------------------
This email may contain confidential information and/or copyright material. This email is intended for the use of the addressee only. Any unauthorized use may be unlawful. If you receive this email by mistake, please advise the sender immediately by using the reply facility in your email software. You should be aware that the contents of this email may be monitored to ensure compliance with the TrixiePixGraphics user policy. Replies to this email are not considered private and may be subject to public dissemination.Poland has very carefully made sure that this signature does not appear in any of her complaints alleging that we posted her info without permission. In fact we had permission – but we certainly didn’t need it. This essentially constitutes a false complaint in each instance. She has purposely and explicitly omitted data from the case which is pivotal to one of the issues she complains about. At the very least, this is dishonest. Here is another signature that appears on our contact page, verbatim:
NOTICE:
Your message is not considered private and may be subject to public dissemination.How very curious that Poland omits this warning as well. Well, it’s not curious to us, because it’s clear to us that this is simply a woman who causes problems probably almost every place she shops, then invents reasons to complain. We submit that she’s likely been doing this her entire life, and that she is absolutely the worst nightmare of every company and retailer she comes in contact with. We pity the retailers in Santa Monica. We bet Poland’s legendary there. We saw that in her in her first email – we “sensed” it – and that’s why we wanted her out of our hair. But even when you spot that steamy, pudding-like, warm and squishy pile of Sheepdog poo right in your path, it's still sometimes impossible not to step in it; then you spend the next three weeks struggling to eradicate the stink. And sometimes you just have to buy a new pair of shoes. We sensed in Poland's demeanor that she was capable of doing exactly what she’s doing, causing problems for everyone around her, where no fault exists, and no problem need occur. This is, we submit, the very essence of Maegan Poland, and we did not want to be another of her victims. We call this the "Paris Hilton Syndrome" (PHS).
Poland tries to assert that she has been defamed and libeled and given the opportunity she’d probably assert she’d been raped and pillaged and held in bondage and robbed and defrauded and had her firstborn stolen – Hell, she’ll probably at some point assert that we killed the Lindbergh baby. What her attorney will tell her, if she’s ever smart enough to go hire one, is that every false complaint she sends out increases the chances that we can someday put her in jail. He will also advise her, if he's worth half the ludicrous fee he'll charge, that we are so far into the middle-ground of our First Amendment protections in the dissemination of the case as to make her attempts to strip us of our Constitutional right to protected speech actionable in and of themselves, and perhaps even prosecutable. We retain an extremely skilled First Amendment attorney. We believe very strongly in the First Amendment. We are counseled very thoroughly in its use. Poland is up a creek without a paddle, and she got there all on her own.
In one of the paragraphs to you Poland lapses into what can only be described as a Halcyon Dream, when she tries to assert that she fears for her physical safety. We call this the "Michael Jackson Syndrome" (MJS). As if no one had seen it before, we can make the statement now that that one assertion, in and of itself, demonstrates to us more clearly than all of her previous rantings combined, that she is in need of psychiatric help. --Serious, long-term help. Poland probably began to realize, somewhere deep in the dark and spooky recesses of her brain, that she had no legitimate reason to complain to your office in the first place. But of course she still WANTED to complain, merely to cause us grief. So she made up the "scared for her safety" ploy. That alone convinced us we were seeing some sort of mental handicap play out. We are actually beginning to feel a bit of compassion here, but that does not mean we ever want to hear from or be the victims of this crazy broad again. If she actually believes she’s in danger, then she needs to be committed so that professionals can begin the long and arduous process of trying to bring her back to reality. If she is merely lying to try to gain sympathy and cause us further grief for preparing her order exactly as she requested, then she should be sued. Indeed, you can put lipstick on a sow and call it Monique, but a pig is still a pig.
Poland ordered a product.
Poland ignored the instructions regarding that order.
Poland then inquired if we would make a new product for free.
We politely declined.
Poland responded with nonsense that had no bearing on the matter and was designed to be insulting.
We then unceremoniously cut Poland off so as to avoid exactly this.The matter could have ended there, but, of course, Maegan Poland is Maegan Poland, and she simply couldn’t allow it to. Poland has no interest whatsoever, we don't believe, in seeing this problem end. It appears she is committed, that she is on a bloody Crusade to inflame and prolong this nonsense just as long as she possibly can, and if she doesn’t have enough fact to write her complaints, she’ll simply make some up (eg “they have threatened me”). She has now filed three Better Business complaints (they would allow no more). She has filed a falsified, or at least disturbingly inaccurate complaint with your office. We believe she has conspired with another person and we believe she may have asked people known to her to send us harassing emails from other emails addresses which trace back to her immediate area. If we can get the matter to court we’ll have subpoena authority, and we can begin matching up phone bills and email records to see if our beliefs are correct. If they are, she could end up facing a charge of conspiracy.
Poland has also supplied us with a great deal more data which needs to be posted online to document the extent and breadth of problem customers in America. Clearly, with over 82 million Google hits, it’s a topic very much on the minds of American businesses who struggle with this problem every hour of every day. Our dissemination of this problem is located by link from our regular “problem customers” page, where it will remain indefinitely.
We had not gotten around to actually filing a police complaint against Poland up to this point. Rest assured, we will do so without delay, and if she continues to try to use third parties to pester and harass us, she may well find herself with a harassment conviction on her record.
Poland is the third most outrageously stupid customer we’ve ever had, and that’s saying something. Is she going for First Place? Perhaps she’ll make it, but it’s a dubious honor. We are considering moving her from the “spoiled brat” section, to the “mentally retarded” section. Let’s see what kind of bone-headed stunt she pulls next. We’re sure it’ll be a doozy.
You’ve been duped into wasting your time by this woman. You weren’t the first, and you won’t be the last.
FakeNewspapers.com
8-9-07
CC: Public Internet Post; Santa Monica PD
BCC:
Web page located at:
/idiots/maegan_poland/maegan_poland.html
Updates will be appended below:
Santa Monica Police Department
333 Olympic Drive
P.O. Box 2200
Santa Monica, CA 90401-2200 Registered USPS Receipt # 21038555749092946492Please consider this a complaint against the following individual, a resident of your fine city:
Maegan Poland
855 10th Street #106
Santa Monica, CA., 90403
maepoland@yahoo.com
Phone: (omitted from public view)
You’re busy and we’re tired, so we’ll be brief.
A couple of weeks ago we received an order for a fake/gag newspaper from one Maegan Poland. She completed the personalization form and included a newspaper headline which necessitated a hyphen in one of the words. The form clearly and explicitly warns all customers against using a headline that must be hyphenated, but this didn’t dissuade Poland. She received her product and, you guessed it, was mad about the hyphenated word. She wrote to us asking that we print a replacement for free. We naturally declined. Poland replied with a bitchy little snippet, and we basically told her to F—off. However she did not F—off.
For the past two weeks we’ve been assaulted by complaints from Poland routed through various agencies. When the Better Business Bureau finally cut her off at three, she switched to your own California Dept. of Justice. It’s interesting to us to recall that a couple of years ago that office received a complaint from us regarding the sum of $660 that went INTO a Paypal account, but was lost by Paypal and never recovered. Despite our repeated insistence that the DOJ respond to our registered letters regarding this sum, they never once did. Yet they seem to have found the time to respond to and process Maegan Poland’s gripe about not following directions when ordering $40 gag product. Very curious.
At any rate since Poland didn’t have any real or legitimate complaint (she received exactly what she ordered and she has not tried to argue that), she probably figured the DOJ wouldn’t take her complaint seriously unless she “pumped it up”. Poland therefore officially filed a complaint with the DOJ stating that we had threatened her to the extent that she was fearful for her personal safety. Maegan Poland has lied to the DOJ.
If Poland had received such a threat from us or anyone else, she should have, and would have, instantly called your office and asked for assistance. She did no such thing because no such threat was ever received by her. She simply made that up in order to get the DOJ to take her complaint seriously. She is using the DOJ and other offices or agencies to cause us grief and force us to respond to complaint after complaint after complaint after complaint. We see this as an organized, premeditated regimen of harassment. We believe Poland is working in concert with one or more others.
Two issues, both of which we feel may be criminal in nature:
- Lying to the DOJ in an attempt to cause us trouble.
- Duping various agencies into contacting us, for no legitimate reason.
We have no doubt that Poland has a long history of this. We have advised her, in writing, to cease and desist. We can prove she received that demand. Yet she continues with an idiotic campaign that serves no legitimate purpose except to harass and annoy. She is now very much subject to civil action and penalties; we submit that she is probably now subject to criminal prosecution as well.
This letter will serve to document this problem, and to ask for relief from your office. We are enclosing her complaint to the DOJ, our response to that complaint, and a copy of the web page where further enlightenment about this problem, as well as any new updates, can be found.Thank you,
TrixiePixGraphics / FakeNewspapers.com
8-12-07 (2nd mailing via registered mail on 10-25-07, Registered USPS Receipt # 21038555749092946492 )
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Update 8-19-07:
We can now document that Mcdermott is collaborating with our second unpleasant customer from that week, Maegan Poland. The two have teamed up in sending complaints to one of the hosts that disseminated this page (Ctyme Web Hosting). The two problem customers featured in these pages may have finally sought legal counsel; if so they were undoubtedly advised, if their attorneys were worth a dime (which is doubtful these days) that they had no legal recourse in this matter, and that they must cease and desist contacting us (Mcdermott finally did stop emailing threats, or perhaps our filters are working better). When attorneys finally "get" that they can no longer stretch, subvert or manipulate the law to their own ends they move into "stage two". Stage Two is where the attorneys abandon the law and look for sneaky, sleazy methods of getting what they want, still within the law, or at least barely within it. To this end it seems clear that someone has advised these two broads to enter into a campaign of pestering the hosts of controversial content to adhere strictly and anally to their own Authorized Use Policies (AUPs). Half the time any given host doesn't even KNOW what its AUP says -- not really. So they are surprised when a complaint comes in to them whining that some piece of content violates that AUP. Like a deer in headlights, many hosts don't really know what to do when confronted with that, so they cave rather than risk further problems from a complainant who is trying their best to side-step the US Constitution and to hide their dirty deeds. Sleazy attorneys have found that every once in awhile this works. So as a last resort, they try it. In this instance, even though Ctyme Web Hosting publicly touts itself as a "Defender of the First Amendment", it is not. It is run by a single guy, who seems not overly bright in the first place (learn to spell, for God's sake learn to spell) who has no clue about the First Amendment, either in fact or in principle. Marc Perkel caved where it was not even a gray area, but clearly black and white. Since Mark Perkel had advised us years before that he specifically would not do that, Mark Perkel has not provided the product he agreed, in writing, to provide, and Mark Perkel will pay the legal price such a misrepresentation demands. It seems now, that Poland and Mcdermott have caused Rackspace a great deal of embarrassment -- which will get worse in about a month. And they may well be indirectly responsible for what could be the end of Ctyme's business, or at least his credibility (which is his business, after all). These two seem to leave a trail of dog-doo wherever they go, simply because they've both done crappy things but don't want anyone to know about it. Obviously, those wishing to disseminate information that is squarely protected by the Constitution should be more careful in their selection of a reputable host. Our accounting of Perkel's reprehensible behavior in this matter is now MOST public. If Perkel doesn't want to host controversial content, then he shouldn't do it. Period. If Perkel doesn't want to host Constitutionally protected speech, then he shouldn't publicly and copiously advertise that he will. Period. No one would think less of him for hosting only the content he wants to host, as long as he's upfront about what that content is. But to say you'll do one thing, and advertise it, and promise it in writing to do it, then go back on that word -- that tends to make for a very famous webhost, and not in any way that's good.
We have switched many of our sites to a failsafe system which allows identical content to be hosted on any number of servers around the world. We will likely switch all of our sites to that system in time, even those that aren't "controversial", because the system is, well, cool. We're not sure why we didn't do that years ago. The benefits are tremendous.
We believe that Poland and Mcdermott sent as many as 12-20 complaints to Perkel. Perkel first emailed us and advised he had basically told the two women to go suck on a stick. Then he changed his mind. Then he changed it back again. Then we got fed up and changed hosts. The timeline of this is documented and is fact. We'll be watching closely to see what tactics these two attempt on our other hosts. It is a legally legitimate action to take, to advise a host of a supposed violation in their AUP. However once that host has tendered a decision and asked that you go away, it is no longer legal to continue to pester that host. Our new hosts are aware of this, and are following this case as it unfolds. We doubt that Poland and Mcdermott will have much luck with them. But they're certainly free to try! And we're certainly free to push and push and PUSH to get criminal charges filed against both of them, one for harassment, and one for lying to the California Department of Justice. We don't care how long this takes or how much it costs. These two women were the last straw for us. We'll go the distance with them both, no matter where that leads..
We do have, at this late date, a bit of insight into the mechanics of how this problem snowballed into its present size. In the case of Mcdermott, she lives in New York. Anyone who has ever visited New York for even a day knows how rude and surly the people there can be. If memory serves, six of the eleven really over-the-top nasty customers we've ever had were from New York City. For whatever reason, New Yorkers seem to think they're just a bit more special than any other people on earth. Never mind that the place is the laughing stock of the rest of the world. Mention New York City in any mixed-company conversation and you'll get a groan, maybe an uncomfortable chuckle, and the topic will change quickly. Everyone has had their troubles with New Yorkers. The theories abound -- maybe New Yorkers are sometimes assholes because of overcrowding. But many other cities have higher population densities yet are not legendary for the obnoxiousness of their people. Maybe it's a 911 thing -- but New Yorkers often sucked long before then. New York IS a "center" of sorts for world travel, commerce, art, fashion. Maybe its people psychologically buy into that perceived success in those areas, and feel that "they", specifically and personally, had something to do with it, and therefore "they", specifically and personally are more "special" because of the success of those areas of endeavor. -- Never mind that they're just a clerk in a store or a secretary in an office. They live in an area that's relatively successful, they have no real successes of their own, so they transmute the success around them so as to feel it also applies to them. Since human beings seldom handle success with poise and dignity, what we see from many New Yorkers is the by-product of that human failing. Remember the character "Nellie" on the old "Little House on the Prairie" TV series? Nellie's behavior is a common human affliction, but perhaps no more prevalent than in New York City. New Yorkers REALLY DO believe they're better than everyone else. It's an attitude that the rest of the world tries to tolerate with a shake of the head and a groan, but which New Yorkers take Oh so seriously. In their hearts and souls they BELIEVE it. In fact it's more than just a belief system -- they know it instinctively, much like the rabid proponent of every religion in the world knows, he KNOWS that HIS religion is the ONLY "true" religion. Watch the attitude of any group of sports fans when "their" team wins. They'll course through the streets post-game whooping and hollering, generally making fools of themselves, because they seem to actually believe that THEY have accomplished something. Never mind that "their" team is just a collection, an amalgamation of whatever athletes the team could afford to draw in from around the country or the world. Many people NEED to feel successful, and so the weakest of them will glom onto the success of others and try to make it their own. We can find no theory that better explains the arrogance, obnoxiousness and often belligerence of many New Yorkers. In the case of Mcdermott, we rather think that the way she treated us is simply how she acts, and she has no clue that others might find it not only objectionable, but actually enraging. She might be completely accustomed to behaving like that and in being around others who behave like that as well, never suspecting that most of the rest of the world still maintains a bit of decorative manners -- at least until they're pissed off..
With regard to the Maegan Polands of the world, well, she lives in Santa Monica. What more can we say. Ever been to that region? Every area of our nation has something unpleasant it's famous for; in Southern California it's terminal silliness. It's a haven for "flower children" and "peace" movements (that usually erupt into violent protests) and "free love". Well everyone knows what California is about. The California that makes most of us cringe and which is the butt of so many late-night comedy hour jokes is really only a small part of the state, say, from San Diego north to Mill Valley, thence east to Sacramento. That's the "silly" California that so often makes the news. The coastline between San Diego and the Bay is the heart of it. Does this mean that all the residents of this region are, well, whacked? Of course not. It does mean, however, that there's a "preponderance" of whackos there, and even the stable, well-rounded, sane residents are painfully aware of the phenomenon and struggle with it almost every day. Places like Santa Barbara and Santa Monica are downright scary to much of the world. Certainly puzzling to the rest. When most people refer to California, that's the region they really mean. Our best selling t-shirt for the past several years is the one that says, "California Go Home". Curiously, many are shipped to California. The rest of the state is pretty-much made up of just normal folks doing whatever it is that normal folks do. Certainly the entire state leans left, but most of the state isn't overtly objectionable, just weird. The coastal region mid and south, however, is overtly objectionable. Why? We don't think ANYONE knows. One theory suggests that since the weather is SO nice, and the area is (or was) SO easy to live in, it tended to attract the shiftless, the believers in a free ride for all, those who felt that hard work and strong principles and honesty and honor were just shadows of the 1930's, something to evolve beyond. We happen to believe in most all of the concepts those people do, peace, love, social and personal entitlement-- it's just that we believe in them IN MODERATION. There are times when peace isn't possible (no, we're not talking about Iraq), for instance, and times when "free" just won't work, and when "entitlement" must have limitations. Californians (speaking of this region) often tend to believe in the ultimate freedom to the Nth degree. Unfortunately they don't stop to think about who's going to PAY FOR IT. Sure it's nice to have a free public transportation system. But who's going to build it? Who's going to maintain it? Who's going to administer it and print the schedules and build the stop booths and make sure it runs. Not Californians, because too many believe everything should be FREE! It would be the ultimate in "social entitlement", according to the ultra-left, for California to have a free mass transit system. But all extreme liberals always forget that one pesky obstacle: Who's going to pay for it!? Some believe that even goods and services should be free (remember Communism?). --That if you need something from a store you should be able to just go pick it up. Many shoplifters secretly feel this way, and use that philosophy to try to validate their crimes. They feel "entitled" to whatever they can get, no matter how they get it, because someone, the retailer, the state -- they're not really sure who, but SOMEONE has SOMEHOW screwed them (or their ancestors) over and OWES THEM. Why? They don't really know the answer to that either. But it's so much fun to just keep on believing that someone owes them, so they do -- regardless of any morsel of reason or logic or sanity that might get in the way. Many ultra-left Californians believe that all businesses are evil and should be taken advantage of at every opportunity. They feel it's their DUTY to do so. Perhaps that's why California as a state is not only broke, it's so far in the proverbial hole it will never, ever climb out. If California was a beautiful ripe fruit in the 1950's, it became a succulent fruit VERY ripe in the 1960's. In the 1970's it was getting a little soft. In the 1980's and 90's it was in the process of going to seed. In the new millennium it's no longer even on the vine -- it's a rotting corpse lying on the ground while the insect world picks it apart. But unlike the fruit which, once gone to seed, grows something fresh and new, California has simply gone to seed, and the seeds of something new have died. If, documentably, most of our problem customers come from New York City, then the majority of the rest come from that peculiar, Twilight Zone region of southern California, where the concept of ultimate entitlement has run absolutely amok. The hilarious movie "Mars Attacks" demonstrates the southern California mentality better than we could ever describe it. No need to name the characters -- you'll know.
Our most poignant memory of southern California is probably this: Many years ago we bought-out a t-shirt shop in Santa Cruz. It had been taxed into bankruptcy. We flew down and rented a U-Haul to drag all the stuff back north. The truck was full of printers, t-shirt stock, presses, you name it. We wanted to fill the fuel tanks initially before leaving town. We pulled into a station with two rows of pumps, four lanes of patrons. It was extremely busy, and took us a good thirty minutes to get up close to the pumps. One old gray hippy van remained in front of us. The driver, a skinny dude with filthy dreadlocks and filthier clothes, moped around, putting in a little gas, then messing with things in the van, then pumping another gallon or two, then messing around with the windshield. He just couldn't get things together to do his chores and get the hell out. After at least 15 minutes he finished pumping and looked as though he was preparing to depart. His "woman" was the usual "free spirit" type, long straggly hair, bad teeth, worn-out skirt that dragged the ground. There were a dozen or more vehicles behind us, and that many lined up at every lane. Tempers were short, but we weren't concerned because WE were NEXT. The driver finally piled into the van and we put our truck in gear and released the brake, ready to move forward. But then the back doors of the van swung open. First one little tot plopped out onto the greasy spot next to the pumps, then another. We thought, "Oh God -- the kids got the back door open and the van's about to pull out!" We were opening our doors to leap out and make a mad dash for the kids so the guy didn't back over them, or leave without them. Just then a third tot, maybe two years old, emerged from the shadows and was lowered very carefully to the ground by a pair of adult arms -- the mother. We thought, "What the Hell is this?". The van's doors then swung all the way open and a panty-less 30-ish woman with hairy legs emerged (we were temporarily blinded) and arranged the three children on the greasy concrete directly behind the van. She sat them in a semi-circle and we were dumbstruck. She then produced a ratty blanket from the van, smallish in size, and placed that in the center of the kids. They sat and waited patiently. We were thinking of honking but didn't want to scare the children. We decided to just watch another minute as it was all quite fascinating. The mother then produced three well-worn plastic bowls and three sets of plastic spoons. Into each bowl she poured a small quantity of dry cereal, and on top of that a splash of milk. She set up three glasses of juice and some napkins. The kids took up their utensils and began eating their breakfast as if it was the most natural thing in the world. Meanwhile cars, trucks, campers and motor homes came and went, spewing exhaust fumes that nearly made even us sick high in the cab of the truck. It was clear the kids had settled in for a lengthy meal, and the driver was back out of the van, messing around at no particular or obvious task. We finally decided enough was enough. We got out of the truck and approached the driver, and advised him that this was not the most appropriate place for a picnic, and asked him to look at the long line of cars waiting to fuel. The guy was instantly enraged and tore into us with a colorful verbal assault. We didn't waste any more time on him but found an attendant and explained what was going on. The attendant walked over and studied the situation, then looked at us, shrugged, and went back to helping another customer. Ah! We were in California! We'd almost forgotten. About then half a dozen irate drivers behind us had come forward to see what the holdup was, and they launched into the attendant. Slowly, reluctantly, the attendant approached the hippy van and asked them to move. They refused. The incident became heated. The station manager finally emerged and threatened to tow the van, at which time they grudgingly piled the kids into the back and pulled ahead 100 feet to a nice grassy area where they could be left alone to picnic all damned day if they so chose. They flipped everyone off and screamed they were going to "get us all". Sure they were. They razzed their engine, belching blue smoke, and tried to peel out, but the ratty only thing just couldn't manage it. We bet, however, that if this bunch ever ordered a fake newspaper from us, they would refuse to read our directions and warnings, and then, when they received what they ordered, they'd raise a stink for weeks and months to come.
In the summer of 2007 a woman from Malibu (California) (not far from Santa Monica) rented a "work loft" in the same building our shop is in. She wanted to make "hand-painted venetian blinds". Well, isn't that ever so California. Still, she had every right to pursue it and everyone wished her well. She moved her equipment in and promptly set up residence in the warehouse as well -- something that is expressly forbidden in the lease. She didn't seem to own a set of street clothing, and so would address customers at the sales counter in her bathrobe (all three of them), and would traverse the commercial neighborhood in that same garment, inspecting the flowers and shrubs of neighboring industrial buildings, often venturing into their sales areas to comment and give advice about the proper rearing of Rhododendrons and the like. She tried to hang with us, but she was always a bit "in your face", far too curious, generally inappropriate, and determined to know the answers to expressly personal questions. We avoided her for awhile, then finally outright banned her from our presence. The building owner finally got wind of her living in the back of her shop, and confronted her. It quickly escalated to a screaming match -- the woman was volatile to say the least. The owner departed, exasperated, and forthwith served the woman with legal notice to stop living in his commercial building or face eviction. She then ramped it up to include non-payment of rent -- she simply stopped paying it! Months later when she was dragged into eviction court she stated she had stopped paying rent because she had no proof (to her personal satisfaction) that the owner was really the owner and not just some goof off the street out to rip her off. The owner's lawyers instantly supplied plenty of proof for the court. So the woman back-pedaled to her original complaint, that being that even though it was in her lease that she could not live in her commercial space, she felt the lease should be changed to accommodate her wishes. Predictably the owner refused to oblige her. She then threw a nasty little tantrum in the courtroom and was none-too-politley deposited out into the hall by the bailiff. The eviction was granted and she was given 30 days to vacate the loft. That should have been that. But there are many Maegen Poland's in this world, and this aging Malibu tart just couldn't grasp this concept. Where does this illogic come from? A lifetime of substance abuse? A parent's lifetime of substance abuse? Plain old genetic stupidity? Are America's intelligent residents being silently replaced with alien imbeciles? How do people this documentably thick find their ways home at night? Seriously! Inquiring minds want to know! A few days ago the entire building was drawn outside to see several deputies pounding on this woman's door. After perhaps ten full minutes she answered -- in her bathrobe. When she refused to get dressed she was told she would be evicted in her bathrobe. She refused to depart under her own steam so she was bodily carried out the door and deposited onto the concrete in the little quasi-park setting in the middle of our horseshoe-shaped building. She was told to leave the premises. She refused, so she was again carried to the public sidewalk out on the ave, and left. Her machinery and stocks of blinds were then carried out and deposited next to her. She ultimately drove away, leaving her stuff, which has slowly vanished as the human street-rats packed it off during the nights since. She has never returned. THAT is the mentality we see overflowing out of the clogged toilet that is Southern California. If there was at least some entertainment value there, perhaps it would be worth it. But as it is, this silly, doped-out crowd is just bloody-well IN THE WAY and of really no redeeming social value whatsoever. There are some great Californians. Some of the most real and well-balanced folks we've ever met hail from there. But they're few and far between.
We KNOW we'll be trashed by the likes of Maegan Poland and Eileen Mcdermott for the rest of their natural lives (each of them have already trashed us publicly). We have every right, legally and morally, to defend ourselves by disseminating these events and by making them credible with the inclusion of official documents. Life has taught us over and over that had we given Poland the free product she was after, and had we ignored Mcdermott's lousy, ugly insults even though her product was perfect and early, we would STILL be trashed. Some people just have to complain, and that one point is the very essence of this entire problem. Since one or more of these broads have already seen fit to lie, our need to disseminate our side of their story is all the more valid. The vast majority of businesses cower from customers like these. We don't. We'll go to extreme lengths to avoid people like this, but when unavoidably confronted with them we won't roll over..
We feel that since Poland and Mcdermott are now collaborating on this campaign to cause us grief, their relationship couldn't be more fitting. On the one hand you have New York City -- arrogant, nasty, dirty, ugly at its core. On the other hand is southern California, more a whimsical freak show than a working society. It delights us to see the two on a collision course. We would caution both parties, however, to take care not to make for us a case for conspiracy. That makes any charges to come all the more potent.
Update 10-25-07:
Let's recap and summarize so we don't lose track of what this case is about:
Maegan Poland placed an order with us for a fake newspaper. She neglected to read the conspicuously-posted instructions regarding the hyphenation of headlines and didn't like the result. Maegen Poland COULD have simply gone back to the product page and READ THE INSTRUCTIONS. She would have then realized that the problem was HER mistake. She was free at that time to either order a corrected product, or not. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then, but she CHOSE not to do so, but to actively and aggressively inflame it further.
Maegan Poland then asked us for a new product for free. We politely declined. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then, but she CHOSE not to do so, but to actively and aggressively inflame it further.
Maegan Poland then replied to us in a snippety, condescending manner. We told her bluntly to go away. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then, but she CHOSE not to do so, but to actively and aggressively inflame it further.
Maegen Poland then filed a complaint against us through the BBB. We responded to that complaint and declined to apologize or make any adjustment. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then, but she CHOSE not to do so; she actively and consciously CHOSE to aggressively inflame it further.
Maegen Poland then sent a second complaint to the BBB with the same demands. We responded to that complaint and declined to apologize or make any adjustment. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then, but she CHOSE not to do so; she actively and consciously CHOSE to aggressively inflame it further.
Maegen Poland then filed a third complaint with the BBB making the same demands. We responded to that complaint and declined to apologize or make any adjustment. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then, but she CHOSE not to do so; she actively and consciously CHOSE to aggressively inflame it further.
The BBB then cut Maegen off at the knees and refused to process any more complaints. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then; she actively and consciously CHOSE to aggressively inflame it further.
Maegen Poland then filed a complaint through the California Department of Justice claiming that we had threatened her and she feared for her physical safety. We responded to that complaint by asking the DOJ to prosecute Poland's complaint as a criminally false report, and we also filed a criminal complaint with the Santa Monica police department against Maegen Poland for registering a false complaint against us. Bottom line: Maegen Poland COULD HAVE allowed this problem to end there and then; she actively and consciously CHOSE to aggressively inflame it further.
We have absolutely no doubt that Maegen Poland is out there somewhere plotting her next attack. She does not seem to "get" that while we probably have enough documentation now to make a criminal charge of harassment stick, we ABSOLUTELY will have enough if she keeps this childish crap up. We absolutely do believe this woman is mentally handicapped, and that's sad. But regular people STILL enjoy protection from these people according to the law. The continuous filing of frivolous, dishonest, false complaints can in and of itself be proven in a court of law to be a form of harassment.
Imagine: All this stems from two errant modes of behavior: A disgusting laziness that refuses to READ INSTRUCTIONS, and an arrogance so bizarre and putrefied as to be religiously committed to trying to make it look as though the rest of the world is at fault. Indeed, the Ugly American lives on.
We believe we can now document that harassing, threatening emails that originated from "a Hollywood studio" back in August of 2007 (as we recall it is located in Burbank) were sent by individual(s) known personally to Maegan Poland. We believe we may finally be able to prove a conspiratorial link between Poland and these criminals; it will likely require subpoena authority to finally nail it down in such a way as to satisfy the court in a criminal context. Since Poland was blocked from harassing us, we believe she incited others to do so and we believe we can prove it in a court of law. Once again, our desire to sidestep and avoid a customer of this mentality is shown to be more than justified. This new evidence is being forwarded to Santa Monica PD on this date. If we can show that Poland has any assets to take we will file a civil suit in Federal court against her for harassment, threats, defamation and libel. Since this disgusting broad claims we have defamed HER, we URGE her to file suit against US. She should do so TODAY, without fail or hesitation. We submit: Poland is a real class act. We saw her coming a mile away; we tried to avoid her; we were unsuccessful. So be it. We'll now endure the consequences of our inability to keep this type of customer out of our store, and deal with the resulting problem.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Epilogue
Epilogue (not conclusion)
An "epilogue" is supposed to come at the end or conclusion of a piece of writing. While this is not the end of our problems with the two individuals in our two sample cases, it represents the conclusion of our philosophies regarding this type of problem -- so we can write it now.
We may well end up in civil or criminal court with either or both of the individuals in these two cases. Those adventures may play out for months or years, and will be detailed painstakingly on this website. We fully expect both of these people to bad-mouth us copiously and forever. All we can do is simply stand up straight, make known our side of their stories, and move forward. We have a hunch that their audiences will, for the most part, consider the sources. Still, we may find that their future actions, whether perpetrated directly or by third parties (friends, relatives, etc.) are actionable, and we'll report any such activity on these pages. Electronic snail-trails are SO easy to follow these days, especially with subpoena authority.
But these most recent experiences have brought us to several conclusions. First, we will no longer interact directly with our customers. This is a tragedy. Much of the fun of this business has been derived from interacting with NICE people, helping them arrange and orchestrate their gags and jokes, and often going that extra mile (or three) to see that everything works out for them. We will miss those people dearly, and we will find that much of our reason for being in this business in the first place has been removed. But even though customers like the two featured above are exceedingly rare, we're not willing to take the chance of interacting with anyone like that again. Nothing is worth it. We just won't do it. It's like the guy who goes to the doc and says, "Gee Doc, whenever I do THIS it hurts like hell." Doc rubs his chin for a moment and says, "Here's my prescription: Don't do THAT.".
Consequently, we are researching customer service companies to take over these interactions. Those companies are equipped to screen their employees for those best suited to taking abuse from bad customers. No one can do that job long, and customer service people routinely burn-out and are rotated out to bring in new, fresh meat for the unwashed masses to assault -- and assault them they will. But those employees, at least before they burn-out and snap, are better suited to the job of dealing with illogical patrons because THEY DON'T CARE. They don't (usually) take things personally. The hired customer service rep isn't the one who worked an extra hour on a customer's order and hand-carried it to the shipping center only to be berated by that same customer because they shipped it too quickly. To the person who performed those perks, the insults are utterly intolerable. The insults go straight to the nerve centers of those workers, and brings them to the boiling point in about .3 seconds flat. The stupid customer then gets the brunt, as well, perhaps, they should. But even the act of venting on some particularly obtuse, spoiled demon-seed-nasty customer takes a toll on the person doing the venting. Up until that time the worker was clipping along, filling orders, enjoying happy thoughts -- only to get blind-sided by some angry-at-life old broad who fully deserves a dose of reality, and gets one. But it uproots all the inner peace and tranquility that worker has cultivated and saved up and before that moment, enjoys. Putting an outrageous customer in their place is something that MUST be done occasionally -- but it's not something ANYONE (we hope) enjoys. A bitchy little dog that nips, gets a sharp reprimand, but it's not something one likes to do. We'd all rather just keep working along in our own little bubble of relative happiness, however real or imagined it may be, without being bitten at all.
To that end we've decided to erect a higher, thicker, more bullet-proof wall between ourselves and those few errant bullets of unreasoning ugliness, the occasional nasty customer. Instead of dealing with them only rarely, we've chosen to deal with them NEVER. To that end we'll place poor, underpaid customer-service suckers between ourselves and the unreasoning louts that American society seems to so profusely produce.
We feel badly about this for two reasons. (1) it seems hardly fair to the customer service employees. No amount of money can compensate them for having to deal with people the likes of which are described on these two pages. (2) This signals the end of helpful customer service. We can and will write up scripts for the customer service reps, so they can answer customer's questions with off-the-shelf, canned responses, which seldom seem to ever really answer anything properly (ever asked for tech help for your glitchy computer?). The OWNER or the ENGINEER of the company who made your computer could take one brief look at the problem and almost instantly effect a cure. But he has learned NOT to deal with customers because, well, no one wants to. Besides, his time and efforts are better spent designing new computers that hopefully (yeah, right) won't suffer from the same problems they did in the past. In the meantime, customers are reduced to interacting with customer service "specialists" who can barely check their own emails, let alone properly keep your computer from spontaneously rebooting every time you type the word "the".
We'll do our best to find a suitable customer service organization, but, honestly, we all know they'll suck. You'll email them and ask if we can just add this one little thing to your order which would make it SO much more appropriate. We might have said yes. The customer service rep's cheat-sheet will tell him to say NO, because he won't be in a position to know what can and can't be technically done in the process of laying out and manufacturing your product. He'll be "just a number" somewhere, anywhere in the world, and he won't have a clue. We don't have a single employee who was willing to even remotely consider taking on this job.
For our great customers, and that's nearly all of you, this is tragic. It signals the end of a very productive one-on-one relationship with you that we've enjoyed now, in many cases, for going on ten years. For the turds, it means they will no longer be capable of enraging us with their insults and threats when their products have been prepared perfectly, and exactly as they were ordered. Our new service reps will simply toss those in the digital trash, and we'll never even see them. Illogical harassment directed at us will become harassment that goes to the service reps, and they will be given full permission to simply call the cops when a customer goes over the line. And still, we won't even be aware of THAT. The only things we'll ever see from the customer will be direct requests for existing products or services that have been screened by customer service and passed to us in a concise and polite form. Absolutely nothing more. Those reps will be instructed to cut the customer off at the very first hint of rudeness and to ignore them thereafter. Our replies will be sent back through the customer service reps, and they'll pass those replies on to the original contact. It's simple, functional, and so bloody inhuman. We apologize to all of you in advance. The two unbelievable women described on these pages aren't the cause of this decision, but they're certainly the straws that broke the camel's proverbial back. To that mentality we simply say NO. MORE. Not once, not ever. Life is far too short to allow ourselves to be dragged down into the reeking mire with entities like that.
Thank you.
TrixiePixGraphics / FakeNewspapers.com
8-13-07
.jpg)
